Has anyone tried the Bigha?

[Lorenzo L. Love]

Larry Varney wrote:

> Lorenzo L. Love wrote:
>
>> Larry Varney wrote:
>>
>>> Lorenzo L. Love wrote:
>>>
>>>> Larry Varney wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Edward Dolan wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> "Larry Varney" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>>>>> news:[email protected]...
>>>>>> [...]
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Read what I have written, Dolan. I have NEVER said anything
>>>>>>> about the
>>>>>>> BiGHA being of good value or not. Period. I have never defended it.
>>>>>>> Period. I have never argued for the purchase of it. Period. If
>>>>>>> you are
>>>>>>> reading what I have posted on ARBR, and yet you claim I have written
>>>>>>> what I have not, then how are we to interpret that? Simple mistakes,
>>>>>>> repeatedly, on your part? Or deliberate fabrications? Which are you
>>>>>>> going to own up to?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Lorenzo has already answered you. Take off your blinders and open
>>>>>> your ears.
>>>>>> Here it is once again:
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> The question was asked of you. Here it is again:
>>>>> If you are reading what I have posted on ARBR, and yet you claim I
>>>>> have written what I have not, then how are we to interpret that?
>>>>> Simple mistakes, repeatedly, on your part? Or deliberate
>>>>> fabrications? Which are you going to own up to?
>>>>>
>>>>>> "I count twenty posts where you 'aren't defending the Bigha'. Just
>>>>>> what
>>>>>> are you doing? Do you think it is worth $3000? Would you buy one for
>>>>>> $3000? These aren't hard questions.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Lorenzo L. Love"
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Like Lorenzo, I too would like to know what you are doing? Is the
>>>>>> Bigha good
>>>>>> value or is it not? That is what all these posts on this thread
>>>>>> are about.
>>>>>> Try to cut to the quick of something for just once in your life
>>>>>> why don't
>>>>>> you? Either do that or confine your conversations on this
>>>>>> newsgroup to lost
>>>>>> souls like Jon Meinecke. He never likes to get to the substance of
>>>>>> anything
>>>>>> either.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> The issue is not the value of the BiGHA, but what criteria are
>>>>> used to judge the value of any bike - or anything at all. I have
>>>>> pointed that out, countless times. No, wait a minute, Lorenzo has
>>>>> counted them. And yet, you can't seem to understand what I've written.
>>>>> Would you really like to "know what [I'm] doing"? OK, here it is
>>>>> again: I am pointing out that the value of a bike is not just
>>>>> pounds per dollar - there are more criteria used than that. As to
>>>>> the relative weights of those criteria, that will vary among the
>>>>> individuals. Racers will care more about the weight, for example,
>>>>> than the color. Components used is also another variable - some
>>>>> people would opt for cheaper stuff, as they would just install some
>>>>> pedals and things they already have. Some people value the
>>>>> ready-to-ride aspects of a delivered product, rather than having to
>>>>> assemble it themselves.
>>>>> These are all criteria that are used in judging the value of a
>>>>> bike. This is what I have been saying. Do you understand it now? If
>>>>> not, I can cut-and-paste the past few paragraphs and put them in
>>>>> another post.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> So what are these criteria? There is what we know about the Bigha:
>>>> Very heavy - negative criteria; very expensive - negative criteria;
>>>> poor reputation of the people making it - negative criteria. What
>>>> positive criteria do you know about the Bigha that outweighs these
>>>> negatives?
>>>>
>>>> Lorenzo L. Love
>>>> http://home.thegrid.net/~lllove
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> There are many criteria for bikes, and the weight given to each
>>> varies depending on who is doing the judging. How did you pick your
>>> bikes, for instance? Was it simply a matter of dividing the price in
>>> dollars by the weight in pounds? Not that this is a bad way of
>>> looking at things - you're entitled to make your decisions based on
>>> the criteria that you consider important.
>>> By the way, "very heavy" is not a critiera, but a judgement. So is
>>> "very expensive". Weight and price are criteria, and apparently the
>>> only ones in existence to some people. I have mentioned several
>>> others numerous times over the past 20 or so posts. Did you miss
>>> them? Dolan apparently has a problem reading what is written, words
>>> and statements and all, and instead concentrates on what he infers
>>> are "intentions" instead. Perhaps you and he share that problem.
>>> Anyway - you seem fixated on this BiGHA bike, demanding that people
>>> come up with reasons why they would or wouldn't buy one. Why is that?
>>> I know of one other person who has taken on a vendetta against a
>>> manufacturer, in this other case it was pedals, and it all came down
>>> to his being miffed that he wasn't give a free set. So now he trashes
>>> them constantly. And, of course, he has never used them.
>>> Could this be the source of your problem with the BiGHA? Isn't it
>>> enough just to point out all of the bad things you noticed when you
>>> rode it? Why do you demand that others provide you with their
>>> evaluations of the bike?
>>
>>
>>
>> You're up to around 26 posts adamantly defending this bike while
>> pretending not to, but you can't say why anyone should buy one. There
>> are several good reason not to, it costs twice as much or more then
>> comparative bikes in it's class for one, but why should anyone buy it?
>>
>> Lorenzo L. Love
>> http://home.thegrid.net/~lllove
>>
>> Talk is cheap because supply exceeds demand
>>
>
> Good God, Love! How am I defending this bike? Have I said anything
> good AT ALL about it? No! What I have said applies to ALL bikes, not
> just this one!
> Why should anyone buy it? Why do you care? GET A LIFE!
>

That's what I been asking. Why should anyone buy it indeed!

Lorenzo L. Love
http://home.thegrid.net/~lllove

Talk is cheap because supply exceeds demand

 

[Lorenzo L. Love]

Larry Varney wrote:
> Melinda Meahan - remove TRASH to reply wrote:
>
>> Edward Dolan wrote:
>>
>>> Like Lorenzo, I too would like to know what you are doing? Is the
>>> Bigha good
>>> value or is it not? That is what all these posts on this thread are
>>> about.
>>
>>
>>
>> My opinion is that it may well be a good machine, but it is not the
>> best value for anybody's money.
>>
>> Melinda, who would never pay $890,000 for a McLaren F1 and has the
>> same opinion of it as well.
>>
>
> I think it's always dangerous to start figuring that any individual
> knows what is best for any other individual, what they should wear, what
> they should eat, and what they should spend their money on.
> You have judged this particular bike not to be worth the money (a good
> value) - for you. But how can you be so sure that it's not a good value
> for someone else? You know the criteria that you're using to determine
> the "best value", but is it the same as someone else's?
> I wonder about people who spend thousands of dollars for a watch, when
> one that keeps very good time can be had for $25 or less. And houses.
> Shouldn't there be a fixed number, based on square feet per dollar, and
> that anything over that one number would be considered not a good value,
> a sign that the buyer has more money than sense, and so on?
> The thing is, we all have our own criteria, or, at least those that we
> share, we view them differently.
> I wonder about those who will pay $1000 more for a Gold Rush than a
> regular Tour Easy, for instance. Is a Gold Rush not the best value for
> anyone's money? I know of quite a few people who would disagree. Are
> they all wrong, and I am right? Who gets to decide?
>

For someone into racing, the four pounds difference between a Tour Easy
and a Gold Rush may be worth $1000. As has been pointed out to you
several times, there is a inverse ratio between weight and cost. But
most people don't buy it for that reason. It's a status symbol. I once
had a guy stop me on the street while I was on my Tour Easy and said
something to the effect "I see you have a Tour Easy, well _I_ have a
Gold Rush!". Not that he ever actually rode it much. He was in a SUV at
the time. I suspect that many of the people who actually buy a Bigha
will do so for the same reason, it simply costs more then the guy next
door's bike, therefore it has more status. Just like that expensive
watch. If you need to buy status, a Bigha may be a good choice for you.
Just leave the price tag on and stay away from bent riders who know better.

Lorenzo L. Love
http://home.thegrid.net/~lllove

Talk is cheap because supply exceeds demand

 

[Lorenzo L. Love]

Curtis L. Russell wrote:
> On Fri, 11 Jun 2004 16:41:23 GMT, "Lorenzo L. Love"
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>>You just can't answer a simple question, can you? Did you buy a Bigha?
>>
>>Lorenzo L. Love
>>http://home.thegrid.net/~lllove
>>
>>Talk is cheap because supply exceeds demand
>
>
> No. I'm not going to buy a Tour Easy or a RANS of any kind or a
> Serotta. By your logic, if I said I liked any of them the comment
> would be untrue because I choose not to buy one. (Whether or not I or
> Larry Varney like the BigHa is NOT an issue - we are discussing your
> comments suggesting that the reviewers are either liars or frauds).
>
> You are have a problem - you are either very young and foolish, you
> have a reading comprehension problem or you have a fixation on the
> BigHa that this group obviously can't correct.
>
> This hasn't been about the BigHa for some time - its been about your
> inability to follow or demonstrate basic logic. Instead you parrot
> your question over and over when it is irrelevant.
>
> It can't even be relevant in your mobius strip world unless you are
> saying that you have bought every bike that you felt was a good value
> as a bike. Is that a fact? Have you purchased every bike you think is
> a good value? Did you purchase the bike this year that you believe to
> be the 'best value'? If not, you are a poseur on your own grounds.
>
> Curtis L. Russell
> Odenton, MD (USA)
> Just someone on two wheels...


This is about value. Do YOU thing a Bigha is a good value? You don't
need to buy one to determine that. Do you think that a 50 lb comfort
bike is a good value at $3000?

Lorenzo L. Love
http://home.thegrid.net/~lllove

Talk is cheap because supply exceeds demand

 

[Lorenzo L. Love]

Larry Varney wrote:
> Edward Dolan wrote:
>
>> "Larry Varney" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>> news:[email protected]...
>>
>>
>>> Edward Dolan wrote:
>>
>>
>> [...]
>>
>>>> Like Lorenzo, I too would like to know what you are doing? Is the Bigha
>>
>>
>> good
>>
>>>> value or is it not? That is what all these posts on this thread are
>>
>>
>> about.
>>
>>>> Try to cut to the quick of something for just once in your life why
>>
>>
>> don't
>>
>>>> you? Either do that or confine your conversations on this newsgroup to
>>
>>
>> lost
>>
>>>> souls like Jon Meinecke. He never likes to get to the substance of
>>
>>
>> anything
>>
>>>> either.
>>>>
>>>
>>> The issue is not the value of the BiGHA, but what criteria are used
>>> to judge the value of any bike - or anything at all. I have pointed that
>>> out, countless times. No, wait a minute, Lorenzo has counted them. And
>>> yet, you can't seem to understand what I've written.
>>> Would you really like to "know what [I'm] doing"? OK, here it is
>>> again: I am pointing out that the value of a bike is not just pounds per
>>> dollar - there are more criteria used than that. As to the relative
>>> weights of those criteria, that will vary among the individuals. Racers
>>> will care more about the weight, for example, than the color. Components
>>> used is also another variable - some people would opt for cheaper stuff,
>>> as they would just install some pedals and things they already have.
>>> Some people value the ready-to-ride aspects of a delivered product,
>>> rather than having to assemble it themselves.
>>> These are all criteria that are used in judging the value of a bike.
>>> This is what I have been saying. Do you understand it now? If not, I can
>>> cut-and-paste the past few paragraphs and put them in another post.
>>
>>
>>
>> You are unable to calibrate which issues are important and which are
>> peripheral. Weight and price are central to the issue of value. Those
>> other
>> issues you think are also important are not important. You are unable to
>> make relevant discriminations. Therefore, you should not be a bicycle
>> reviewer. You will lead lesser minds than mine astray with your
>> analysis of
>> a bike's value because you are unable to advise a prospective
>> purchaser of
>> what is important when it comes to getting a bike. Think weight and price
>> and you will never be too far from wrong. It is not JUST pounds per
>> dollar,
>> but it is MOSTLY pounds per dollar. Thus spake Zarathustra!
>>
>
> Nonsense. Weight and price are important, certainly. But to say that
> the other criteria are not important is, well, stupid and arrogant. Now,
> if you were to say that they weren't important *to you*, that's fine.
> But just to make that claim, for everyone, is stupid and arrogant. Who
> the hell are *you* to decide for everyone that the other things that
> lead them to choose between one item and another are not important?
> I do not tell people what a bike's "value" is; I leave that to the
> arrogant and stupid. I tell them what *I* think of a bike, I talk about
> various aspects of it, how it rode, what sort of components it had, and
> yes, how much it weighed and how much it cost. I decide *for myself* if
> something is a good value. And, if I decide that it is, chances are good
> that I'll buy it. If not, I don't. Simple enough for most to understand.
> The value is up to the individual. Or do you disagree? That's a simple
> question, Dolan. Do you agree that the value is up to the individual or
> not?
>

I know a slow heavy comfort is not a good value for me at $3000. Nor is
it for Ed Dolan. So is the Bigha a good value for YOU? If no, then we
all agree!
You're up to about 30 posts now defending this bike. What's the attraction?

Lorenzo L. Love
http://home.thegrid.net/~lllove

Talk is cheap because supply exceeds demand

 

[Larry Varney]

Lorenzo L. Love wrote:
<snip>
>
> I know a slow heavy comfort is not a good value for me at $3000. Nor is
> it for Ed Dolan. So is the Bigha a good value for YOU? If no, then we
> all agree!
> You're up to about 30 posts now defending this bike. What's the attraction?
>
> Lorenzo L. Love
> http://home.thegrid.net/~lllove
>
> Talk is cheap because supply exceeds demand
>

I give up. You are either deliberately obtuse, or one of the
stupidest people I have ever seen posting. I have said nothing good
about this bike, and yet you claim that I'm defending it.
Have I said good things about the bike? No. Have I disputed any
claims that you have made about the bike? No. Of course, there's little
point in disputing the claims of someone who has never seen, much less
ridden it. Have I bought a BiGHA? No.
And yet you claim that I'm "defending" the bike. On what grounds?
That I keep telling you, over and over and over again, that there are
many criteria involved in the evaluation and purchase of EVERYTHING, not
just this one bike? That is a defense of the bike? How?
Love, if I were defending the bike, I would talk about how smooth it
rode, how fast it was, how the weight didn't matter, how the price is
justfified for one or multiple reasons, and so on. Have I done that? No.
Have I done anything even remotely like that? No.
Of course, it's not necessary for me to have actually written
anything like that, is it? Both you and Dolan love your little game,
your little childish antics of making obviously baseless accusations,
based not on what was actually written, but on what Dolan calls
"intentions". It would be funny, except that I suspect there might be
some medical condition behind it all.
So which is it, Love? Deliberate? A medical condition? Or are you
honestly stupid?

--
Larry Varney
Cold Spring, KY
http://home.fuse.net/larryvarney

 

[Lorenzo L. Love]

Larry Varney wrote:

> Lorenzo L. Love wrote:
> <snip>
>
>>
>> I know a slow heavy comfort is not a good value for me at $3000. Nor
>> is it for Ed Dolan. So is the Bigha a good value for YOU? If no, then
>> we all agree!
>> You're up to about 30 posts now defending this bike. What's the
>> attraction?
>>
>> Lorenzo L. Love
>> http://home.thegrid.net/~lllove
>>
>> Talk is cheap because supply exceeds demand
>>
>
> I give up. You are either deliberately obtuse, or one of the stupidest
> people I have ever seen posting. I have said nothing good about this
> bike, and yet you claim that I'm defending it.
> Have I said good things about the bike? No. Have I disputed any claims
> that you have made about the bike? No. Of course, there's little point
> in disputing the claims of someone who has never seen, much less ridden
> it. Have I bought a BiGHA? No.
> And yet you claim that I'm "defending" the bike. On what grounds? That
> I keep telling you, over and over and over again, that there are many
> criteria involved in the evaluation and purchase of EVERYTHING, not just
> this one bike? That is a defense of the bike? How?
> Love, if I were defending the bike, I would talk about how smooth it
> rode, how fast it was, how the weight didn't matter, how the price is
> justfified for one or multiple reasons, and so on. Have I done that? No.
> Have I done anything even remotely like that? No.
> Of course, it's not necessary for me to have actually written anything
> like that, is it? Both you and Dolan love your little game, your little
> childish antics of making obviously baseless accusations, based not on
> what was actually written, but on what Dolan calls "intentions". It
> would be funny, except that I suspect there might be some medical
> condition behind it all.
> So which is it, Love? Deliberate? A medical condition? Or are you
> honestly stupid?
>

You are just incapable of answering a simple question, aren't you? Is
the Bigha a good value for YOU?

If you are not defending the Bigha in the last thirty odd posts, just
what are you doing? Is this some sick personal attack? Why does it
matter so much to you that many people think the Bigha is grossly
overpriced?

Lorenzo L. Love
http://home.thegrid.net/~lllove

"If you would know the value of money, go and try to borrow some."
Benjamin Franklin

 

[Mark Leuck]

"Hashim El Amin" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> >
> > So you are quite happy to buy something at an inflated price from a
> > group of people who have previously walked away from contracts,
> > warranties and product support?
> >
> > Lorenzo L. Love
> > http://home.thegrid.net/~lllove
> >
> > Talk is cheap because supply exceeds demand
>
> "A group of people who have previously walked away from contracts,
> warranties and product support?"
>
> Who is in this group of people, exactly? Can you name the specific
> individuals who are not to be trusted? And what contracts did they
> walk away from? What were the terms? Who signed said contracts? Were
> they personally guaranteed? By who?
>
> Had Bigha's founder been BikeE's founder, I could maybe see where you
> were drawing this parallel. However, it is clear to me that Bigha is
> being run by a wise business man who knows how to turn a profit.
> Since businesses are designed to make a profit and profitless
> businesses eventually shut down (like BikeE did), this would lead me
> to conclude Bigha will be around for a while.

I think the jury is still out if BigHa has made a profit yet, the bike's not
been out very long and we don't know specific sales figures

 

[Mark Leuck]

"Lorenzo L. Love" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> So what are these criteria? There is what we know about the Bigha: Very
> heavy - negative criteria; very expensive - negative criteria; poor
> reputation of the people making it - negative criteria. What positive
> criteria do you know about the Bigha that outweighs these negatives?

If you read the reviews there were plenty of positives, here's one so try
reading, in fact I have yet to see a negative review of the bike, might be
because they actually rode them instead of just *****ing at it

http://mountainbike.about.com/cs/recumbents/a/bighareview.htm

 

[Mark Leuck]

"Larry Varney" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> There are many criteria for bikes, and the weight given to each
> varies depending on who is doing the judging. How did you pick your
> bikes, for instance? Was it simply a matter of dividing the price in
> dollars by the weight in pounds? Not that this is a bad way of looking
> at things - you're entitled to make your decisions based on the criteria
> that you consider important.
> By the way, "very heavy" is not a critiera, but a judgement. So is
> "very expensive". Weight and price are criteria, and apparently the only
> ones in existence to some people. I have mentioned several others
> numerous times over the past 20 or so posts. Did you miss them? Dolan
> apparently has a problem reading what is written, words and statements
> and all, and instead concentrates on what he infers are "intentions"
> instead. Perhaps you and he share that problem.
> Anyway - you seem fixated on this BiGHA bike, demanding that people
> come up with reasons why they would or wouldn't buy one. Why is that? I
> know of one other person who has taken on a vendetta against a
> manufacturer, in this other case it was pedals, and it all came down to
> his being miffed that he wasn't give a free set. So now he trashes them
> constantly. And, of course, he has never used them.
> Could this be the source of your problem with the BiGHA? Isn't it
> enough just to point out all of the bad things you noticed when you rode
> it? Why do you demand that others provide you with their evaluations of
> the bike?

His problem isn't with the bike, its with the company who makes the bike

 

[Mark Leuck]

"skip" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news[email protected]...
>
> "Larry Varney" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> <snip>
>
> > Melinda Meahan - remove TRASH to reply wrote:
> > > My opinion is that it may well be a good machine, but it is not the
best
> > > value for anybody's money.
> > >
> > > Melinda, who would never pay $890,000 for a McLaren F1 and has the
same
> > > opinion of it as well.
> > >
> >
> > I think it's always dangerous to start figuring that any individual
> > knows what is best for any other individual, what they should wear, what
> > they should eat, and what they should spend their money on.
>
>
> Right Larry. Melinda's dangerous figuring should'nt be allowed around
here.
>
> skip
> (Who is thinking about getting a McLaren to speed up his commute)

Damn I was just going to taunt you for purchasing an overpriced car

 

[Mark Leuck]

"Lorenzo L. Love" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>>
> For someone into racing, the four pounds difference between a Tour Easy
> and a Gold Rush may be worth $1000.

Far too much to pay for 4 pounts less weight using the logic in your
previous posts

> As has been pointed out to you
> several times, there is a inverse ratio between weight and cost.
> But
> most people don't buy it for that reason. It's a status symbol. I once
> had a guy stop me on the street while I was on my Tour Easy and said
> something to the effect "I see you have a Tour Easy, well _I_ have a
> Gold Rush!". Not that he ever actually rode it much.

How do you know he didn't ride it much? I doubt the status symbol part, If I
had to guess they'd buy the bike to have something different which is the
same reason I bought mine

> He was in a SUV at
> the time.

I was at White Rock lake in Dallas today, plenty of SUV's driven by people
who ride bikes quiet a bit

> I suspect that many of the people who actually buy a Bigha
> will do so for the same reason, it simply costs more then the guy next
> door's bike, therefore it has more status. Just like that expensive
> watch.

Maybe they just liked the bike or the watch? If they really wanted to outdo
the guy next door they wouldn't buy a BigHa, instead they'd pay twice that
for a carbon fiber Trek or Cannondale. $3000 is chump change at my area bike
store

> If you need to buy status, a Bigha may be a good choice for you.
> Just leave the price tag on and stay away from bent riders who know
better.
>
> Lorenzo L. Love
> http://home.thegrid.net/~lllove
>
> Talk is cheap because supply exceeds demand

Your tagline says it all

 

[Mark Leuck]

"Lorenzo L. Love" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Mark Leuck wrote:
> > "Lorenzo L. Love" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > news:[email protected]...
> >
> >>Because if you didn't give a fair and impartial review, you wouldn't be
> >>working for Consumer Reports for long. Consumer Reports, because they
> >>buy the product and are not dependent on the manufacturers for free
> >>products, can insist on fair reviews. Who does that for recumbents?
> >
> >
> > So what you are saying is anything a reviewer who receives free bikes is
> > meaningless?
> >
> >
>
> Not completely meaningless but you have to take into account that they
> can not be too critical or make a no buy recommendation.

Sure they can, first off its nearly impossible to find a BAD recumbent so
they'd never say "don't buy this bike" anyway. Bicycles aren't that complex
of a device and any critical remarks will always be based on the same things
such as comfort, tires and mechanical things like shifters or brakes, I've
yet to see a review where they weren't critical of any of these

Can you name one reviewer that isn't too critical and won't make a no buy
recommendation?

 

[Mark Leuck]

"Larry Varney" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...

> brief ride on a Vision.
> It took all of about 15 minutes to realize that the "facts" were
> wrong, that swb were not "twitchy". At least, not this one. So, maybe
> others weren't either. Shortly after that ride, I bought an Haluzak
> Horizon, followed by a string of several other swb recumbents. And guess
> what? They weren't twitchy at all.

Odd because while I didn't find my Vision to be twitchy I did find the
Haluzak was

 

[Larry Varney]

Mark Leuck wrote:
> "Larry Varney" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>
>
>>brief ride on a Vision.
>> It took all of about 15 minutes to realize that the "facts" were
>>wrong, that swb were not "twitchy". At least, not this one. So, maybe
>>others weren't either. Shortly after that ride, I bought an Haluzak
>>Horizon, followed by a string of several other swb recumbents. And guess
>>what? They weren't twitchy at all.
>
>
> Odd because while I didn't find my Vision to be twitchy I did find the
> Haluzak was
>
>

It's odd how some people have trouble with one bike, but a fairly
similar one seems to be OK. I've known people who could handle swb but
flopped all over on a lwb, and vice-versa. Which really does emphasize
the point that people really need to check out bikes themselves, when at
all possible.

--
Larry Varney
Cold Spring, KY
http://home.fuse.net/larryvarney

 

[Larry Varney]

Lorenzo L. Love wrote:
> Larry Varney wrote:
>
>> Lorenzo L. Love wrote:
>> <snip>
>>
>>>
>>> I know a slow heavy comfort is not a good value for me at $3000. Nor
>>> is it for Ed Dolan. So is the Bigha a good value for YOU? If no, then
>>> we all agree!
>>> You're up to about 30 posts now defending this bike. What's the
>>> attraction?
>>>
>>> Lorenzo L. Love
>>> http://home.thegrid.net/~lllove
>>>
>>> Talk is cheap because supply exceeds demand
>>>
>>
>> I give up. You are either deliberately obtuse, or one of the
>> stupidest people I have ever seen posting. I have said nothing good
>> about this bike, and yet you claim that I'm defending it.
>> Have I said good things about the bike? No. Have I disputed any
>> claims that you have made about the bike? No. Of course, there's
>> little point in disputing the claims of someone who has never seen,
>> much less ridden it. Have I bought a BiGHA? No.
>> And yet you claim that I'm "defending" the bike. On what grounds?
>> That I keep telling you, over and over and over again, that there are
>> many criteria involved in the evaluation and purchase of EVERYTHING,
>> not just this one bike? That is a defense of the bike? How?
>> Love, if I were defending the bike, I would talk about how smooth it
>> rode, how fast it was, how the weight didn't matter, how the price is
>> justfified for one or multiple reasons, and so on. Have I done that?
>> No. Have I done anything even remotely like that? No.
>> Of course, it's not necessary for me to have actually written
>> anything like that, is it? Both you and Dolan love your little game,
>> your little childish antics of making obviously baseless accusations,
>> based not on what was actually written, but on what Dolan calls
>> "intentions". It would be funny, except that I suspect there might be
>> some medical condition behind it all.
>> So which is it, Love? Deliberate? A medical condition? Or are you
>> honestly stupid?
>>
>
> You are just incapable of answering a simple question, aren't you? Is
> the Bigha a good value for YOU?
>
> If you are not defending the Bigha in the last thirty odd posts, just
> what are you doing? Is this some sick personal attack? Why does it
> matter so much to you that many people think the Bigha is grossly
> overpriced?
>
> Lorenzo L. Love

If I am not defending the BiGHA - Love, are you really that dense?
Have you not honestly been able to see that I've been explaining, again
and again, the idea of numerous criteria for all purchases, and how they
are viewed in different ways by different people? How many times does
that need to be explained to you? How can you possibly see this as a
defense of ANYTHING, much less one particular bike?
And I don't care at all what you think of any bike, much less one
you've never seen nor ridden. Why should I? Could your opinions have any
credence at all, based as they are on NOTHING?
And as for whether or not the BiGHA is a good value for me
personally, I have to say that, unlike certain really stupid people, I
need some actual experiences with the bike before I'm ready to pass
judgement on it. If I were to actually ride the thing for a while, I
would be able to say whether or not I thought it was worth the money
being asked for it.
Here's something for you to think about, Love. Think about the
statements I've made about the BiGHA specifically, the ones where I used
its name in a sentence, for example. Write them down, and circle the
words that describe the bike in favorable terms. Those would be called
compliments. Then find the ones where I am referring to the bike in
specific words, and am refuting the opinions of those who are attacking
it. That would be defending it. Circle those words.
And then come back and tell us just what I said that was a compliment
about the bike, along with the sentences that specifically defended it.
OK? This will be a good exercise for you, comparing reality with what
you've been claiming.

--
Larry Varney
Cold Spring, KY
http://home.fuse.net/larryvarney

 

[skip]

> "Hashim El Amin" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> > >
<snip>
.. However, it is clear to me that Bigha is
> > being run by a wise business man who knows how to turn a profit.
> > Since businesses are designed to make a profit and profitless
> > businesses eventually shut down (like BikeE did), this would lead me
> > to conclude Bigha will be around for a while.
>
"Mark Leuck" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:qEsyc.33638$Sw.24914@attbi_s51...
>
> I think the jury is still out if BigHa has made a profit yet, the bike's
not
> been out very long and we don't know specific sales figures
>
>

It there is any truth at all to the claim that they spent 1/2 million
dollars to develop a mesh seat that's sure to give you recumbent butt, then
I have to wonder about the wisdom of the decision makers at BiGHA. Seems to
me that pissing away a half million on the seat would tend to have a
negative effect on BiGHA's ability to turn an early profit. I have no idea
how much profit is built into each BiGHA sold, but I bet they'll have to
sell a whole bunch of 'em to recover the claimed seat development cost.

skip - whose glad it isn't his money

 

[Mark Leuck]

"Larry Varney" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Mark Leuck wrote:
> > "Larry Varney" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > news:[email protected]...
> >
> >
> >>brief ride on a Vision.
> >> It took all of about 15 minutes to realize that the "facts" were
> >>wrong, that swb were not "twitchy". At least, not this one. So, maybe
> >>others weren't either. Shortly after that ride, I bought an Haluzak
> >>Horizon, followed by a string of several other swb recumbents. And guess
> >>what? They weren't twitchy at all.
> >
> >
> > Odd because while I didn't find my Vision to be twitchy I did find the
> > Haluzak was
> >
> >
>
> It's odd how some people have trouble with one bike, but a fairly
> similar one seems to be OK. I've known people who could handle swb but
> flopped all over on a lwb, and vice-versa. Which really does emphasize
> the point that people really need to check out bikes themselves, when at
> all possible.

The twitchy part didn't really bother me, the seat did, when it was reclined
I could no longer put my feet flat on the ground like I could with the
Vision. Another odd note is people at my work loved riding the Vision but
can't seem to get the hang of my Optima Baron, I had no problems at all
adjusting

Go figure

 

[Edward Dolan]

"Larry Varney" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Edward Dolan wrote:
[...]
> > As stated above, I read for the overall sense of what is being said. You
> > should try it sometime yourself. As far as I am concerned, you leave way
too
> > many statements just hanging unconnected to anything. So I have to make
the
> > connections for you. And you never come to a conclusion about anything.
> > Consequently, many of your posts strike me as being pointless. But I am
very
> > good at completing other's thoughts and coming to conclusions. It is
what I
> > do best in life. If you do not want others doing it for you, then do it
> > yourself.
> >
> > Is Bigha good value or isn't it? That is the question that Lorenzo and I
> > would like you to answer.
> >
>
> ROTFL! You may "read for the overall sense", and yet you come to
> completely incorrect conclusions. You claim I am saying something that
> is not to be found, not in the slightest, in anything I've written. You
> connect what I have written with things that are only in your mind, and
> then blame ME for the result. My points are always clear, and I state
> them, over and over again, in the hopes that perhaps someday someone can
> help you understand.
> You do not need to complete my thoughts on this issue, Dolan, nor do
> you need to come to any other conclusions than this: there are many
> criteria involved in buying things, including bikes. Some criteria are
> weighted more, some less, depending solely on the individual. Do you
> understand, Dolan? Do I need to use different words? Perhaps put it all
> in some sort of outline?

But you do not know how to weigh anything. You think perhaps that the
quality of the components is the equal of the overall weight of the bike or
of the price. That is why I regard you as an idiot. Also, criteria never
depend solely on the individual. There are always universal criteria and if
the individual does not recognize those universal criteria, well then the
individual is an idiot - which you prove every time you post.

> Maybe if you thought about what I've said, and tried to see if you
> agreed with me or not, that might help. So let's hear it: do you agree,
> or disagree, that there are many criteria involved in buying things, and
> that different people weigh those criteria differently? Yes or no,
> Dolan. Or do you need me to make it even simpler?

I disagree with what you have said above. You have made it way too
subjective. There are always objective criteria which have nothing to do
with what any individuals might think because individuals can think wrongly
due to ignorance or just plain lack of knowledge. I believe that is what
Lorenzo is saying is that Bigha will not market to recumbent shops and to
sophisticated recumbent buyers. Instead they are catering to ignoramuses -
and you are supporting this fiasco by defending Bigha the way you do. But
you are not fooling me or anyone else here who knows anything about
recumbents. We know that a recumbent is mainly a frame and wheels and that
weight and price are important and everything else is Mickey Mouse no matter
what some "individuals" might think is important.

> As for what you and Love want - which, apparently, is for me to
> decide for you the value of the BiGHA bike - why ask me? Am I the sole
> arbiter of worth? Do you trust, or need, me to decide whether or not a
> particular bike is a good value? If I say yes, will you go out and buy
> one? If I say no, will you not buy one?

But are you not a reviewer for Bike Rider Online? It is your duty to advise
the less knowledgeable if a bike is a good buy or not. If you do not doing
this very elementary thing, then you are failing in your duty as a reviewer.
If I were Ball, I would fire you for dereliction of duty.

> You and Love should be able to figure it all by now, Dolan. It's not
> a difficult conclusion to come to. But, just in case you really do need
> for me to tell you what to think and what to conclude, here it is:
> The value of anything, including the BiGHA, is determined by each
> individual. Each individual should be able to come to a decision as to
> whether or not it's worth the asking price. This goes for bikes, trikes,
> horses, cars, hamburgers, you name it.

No, we have fundamental disagreement here. There are always universal
criteria for determining the value for price for any product. I spent many
hours as a youth reading Consumer's Reports and Consumer's Digest reviews of
various products. It is not up to the individual to decide these things. It
is up to honest reviewers who are expert to give the rest of us a clue as
to what is good value and what is not good value.What does the average
consumer know about anything when you get right down to it?

> Now, if you truly do need me or anyone else to tell you which is a
> good value in any or all of these items, then you really do have my pity.

I would like you to tell me what is good value because you have had an
opportunity to test ride various recumbents which I can never do. I rely on
a reviewer for information of all kinds. This is why I have been reading RCN
all these many years and why I don't bother with Bike Rider Online which I
understand you are affiliated with. Why should I read your reviews if you
are not going tell me what is a good buy and what is not a good buy.

If you have test ridden the Bigha, now is the time to tell us if it is a
good buy or not. Once you have told us that, we will know what to think of
you as a reviewer.

--
Ed Dolan - Minnesota

 

[Edward Dolan]

"Larry Varney" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Edward Dolan wrote:
[...]
> > You are unable to calibrate which issues are important and which are
> > peripheral. Weight and price are central to the issue of value. Those
other
> > issues you think are also important are not important. You are unable to
> > make relevant discriminations. Therefore, you should not be a bicycle
> > reviewer. You will lead lesser minds than mine astray with your analysis
of
> > a bike's value because you are unable to advise a prospective purchaser
of
> > what is important when it comes to getting a bike. Think weight and
price
> > and you will never be too far from wrong. It is not JUST pounds per
dollar,
> > but it is MOSTLY pounds per dollar. Thus spake Zarathustra!
> >
>
> Nonsense. Weight and price are important, certainly. But to say that
> the other criteria are not important is, well, stupid and arrogant. Now,
> if you were to say that they weren't important *to you*, that's fine.
> But just to make that claim, for everyone, is stupid and arrogant. Who
> the hell are *you* to decide for everyone that the other things that
> lead them to choose between one item and another are not important?

I am a universalist and I do not ever think for a moment that I am in any
way unique. If it applies to me, then it applies to everyone else in the
known universe.

> I do not tell people what a bike's "value" is; I leave that to the
> arrogant and stupid. I tell them what *I* think of a bike, I talk about
> various aspects of it, how it rode, what sort of components it had, and
> yes, how much it weighed and how much it cost. I decide *for myself* if
> something is a good value. And, if I decide that it is, chances are good
> that I'll buy it. If not, I don't. Simple enough for most to understand.

You are failing in your duty as a reviewer for a recumbent publication if
you do not tell folks if you think a bike is a good value or not, not just
for you but for them. It takes a bit of courage to be able to do this, but
that is what you are being paid for. You should think about resigning your
position at Bike Rider Online if you feel you can't make any kind of
statements about whether or not a bike is good value.

> The value is up to the individual. Or do you disagree? That's a
> simple question, Dolan. Do you agree that the value is up to the
> individual or not?

Yes I do disagree! The value is not up to the individual. What do
individuals (the average slob consumer) know about anything anyway except
what reviewers tell them. Unless you have spent 10 years reading RCN you
will not know anything worth knowing about recumbents. That is why
reviewers like you have important responsibilities to inform consumers not
only with factual information (which most reviewers are pretty good at) but
to advise them on what is good value. Mr. Bryant of RCN has always performed
this elementary duty admirably.

--
Ed Dolan - Minnesota

 

[Melinda Meahan - remove TRASH to reply]

Larry Varney wrote:

> I think it's always dangerous to start figuring that any individual
> knows what is best for any other individual, what they should wear, what
> they should eat, and what they should spend their money on.
> You have judged this particular bike not to be worth the money (a good
> value) - for you. But how can you be so sure that it's not a good value
> for someone else? You know the criteria that you're using to determine
> the "best value", but is it the same as someone else's?

That's not what I am saying. I am saying that if you spend $3K on that
bike, a lot of what you are buying according to the old marketing ditty,
is "sizzle" and not "steak." Paying a large price for "sizzle" makes
something not a good value. That doesn't mean that some people won't
prefer it.

--
Where no oxen are, the crib is clean,
But much benefit is derived from the labor of the ox.